In Defiance of Malfeasance

The Social-Political alliances initiated by individuals in the media, public and legislative sectors of Houston beginning in September 2003 and continuing until this day have continued to derail the release of Jon Buice.  As each year passed more and more erroneous detail about the crime that never went to trial, has over-whelmed the thought process of many.  For thirteen years and nearly as many parole sessions the media rhetoric has been malicious in their presentation of facts about the events that lead to the death of Paul Broussard.  Their one-sided malefic approach has shaped public thought and opinion through "fixed images" of a "hate crime".  All opinion contrary to those fixed images were quickly subdued and not allowed to contradict the mindset of the Greater Houston Area general public.  The voices of Ray Hill (Gay Rights Advocate), Susan Bardwell, deceased (Police Reporter-Houston Chronical) and others have been overshadowed by Andy Kahan (Self-anointed Victims’ Rights Advocate) though the use of the Houston Media, and others to protest the release of Jon. (See “Conspiracy”, previous entry in this blog)

In 2015, Alison Armstrong’s documentary “The Guy with the Knife” was released at the Dallas International Film Festival (DIFF) (See “The Guy with the Knife”, previous entry in this blog).  It was during this showing that I became aware of Maria Gonzalez, Associate Professor of English, University of Houston and past president of the Houston GLBT Caucus.  I quickly noticed a stark contrast of opinion between her and Noel Freeman, (See “How is it That..”, previous entry this blog) another past president of the Houston GLBT Caucus, but gave it little thought until Alison screened the film at the U of H (See “Tale of Two Universities”, previous entry in this blog).  I queried Alison Armstrong, after the Dallas showing, about Gonzalez and Alison explained to me that she was keenly interested in the truth about Jon and had agreed to be in the documentary.

In April 2015, during the screening at the U of H, I met Maria Gonzalez and was moved by her earnest attempt to come to a truth in the matter of Jon.  At this showing Andy Kahan was asked about his involvement with politicians’ in the parole of Jon.  Andy exclaimed that he could not release such information.  Gonzalez was quick to answer with the names of those politicians.  My interest in her was greatly enhanced and I asked her if she would be interested in meeting Jon, face to face.  Gonzalez indicated that she was interested and would entertain the liaison in the August time frame.

Prior to Maria Gonzalez going to visit with Jon, I asked her to have lunch with me in order to gain some insight into her thought processes and to impart knowledge on how Jon was raised and what my objectives were for our meeting.  Over the course of an hour and a half we discussed how she and I came to be at the point in life we were presently.  It became apparent that we shared many things in common as adolescents.  We also came to realize that we would unite in the cause of Jon’s parole. At this meeting she indirectly indicated that she was familiar with John Whitmire and Garnet Coleman, having helped on their campaigns for office and in the role they played in the parole processes of Jon. She said she would be willing to redirect initiatives originally put into place to keep Jon incarcerated. We did not discuss the current social-political rhetoric about Jon; rather we both agreed that she should formulate an opinion of Jon after her visit with him in August.  Based on meeting with Jon she could then reconsider redirection of the social-political initiatives.  I left the luncheon with hope that this would be the year my son comes home.

On Saturday, August 22, 2015, Mara Gonzalez came face to face with the 17 year old-now 41 year old horrific homophobic killer she believed existed in Jon since the days of the crime.  Having been a frequent visitor of the Montrose area during those days she surely felt the essence of the time.  I can only imagine the emotions she had sitting there in a small corridor of seats along the south wall of the Ramsey Unit Visitation Building.  It is miserable at best.  Even the contact visitation area is not much better.  Both areas are crowded and noisy.  The biggest difference is that in Unit Visitation Building you have the constant arrival of families and friends of inmates and the chatter of others seated in the cramped visitation area.  Most of the noise is due to a plexi-glass wall with small holes in it that divides the inmate from the visitor.  One practically has to yell to be heard over others.

I can only surmise as Maria sat there the many things that went through her mind and what direction this meeting would take between her and Jon:  What sort of man was Jon in reality?  Is he the person deserving of parole the documentary expresses?  Plus a hundred other questions I could not begin to know of must have entered her mind.  I can only express here what Jon told me after their meeting later that evening and what she expressed to me in an email following her visit.

Jon told me that evening that he felt that the meeting was most rewarding and that Maria and he discussed everything from his involvement in Paul’s death to his accomplishments and hopes for the future.  Jon spoke of moments when both he and Maria were either in tears or near to them as the realities of his life unfolded.  Acceptance, Redemption, Forgiveness, all areas of Jon’s being was laid out for Maria.  Jon said that he held back nothing of what was asked of him that day.

Later that evening I emailed Maria asking her opinion of Jon and her view of the meeting with him.  She replied, “My visit with Jon went very well.”  She expressed that she enjoyed talking with him on numerous topics.  She said that she was impressed with his intellect and how hard he has worked to stay above the normal inmate one expects to see in prison.  Maria gave me great hope when she said, “Jim, you have a fine son in Jon”.  It made my heart swell to hear that from someone who thought otherwise just a few years ago.

I realized at that moment that Maria Gonzalez, in defiance to the malfeasance of the “Hate Crime” rhetoric crowd, has become a new supporter for the release of Jon Buice.  I applaud you Maria and call you friend.

James Buice

8/27/15

A Tale of Two Universities……

For the DIFF 2015 Review by Truth in Cinema click on the following:
DIFF 2015 Review: 'The Guy With The Knife' Digs Into Media .

On Tuesday April 21, 2015 there were two separate showings of Alison Armstrong’s, “The Guy with the Knife”.   The first showing was at Texas Southern University, located in the heart of Houston-minutes from downtown.  The University is home to nearly 10,000 students yearly.  The documentary was hosted by Associate Professor of Journalism, Michael Berryhill.  The second showing was at the University of Houston, also located in the heart of Houston-minutes from downtown.  The University is home to 40,000 plus students each year. The documentary was sponsored by The GLBT Resource Center, Women’s Gender and Sexuality Studies, Department of History, The Center for Public History, and The Department of English and hosted by Associate Professor of English, Maria Gonzales. The day would prove to be a major contrast played out in the two universities between 2 pm and 9 pm. TSU, students and Alumni gathered to view Alison’s film to understand the importance of truth in journalism.  U of H students and Alumni were not integral to the showing of the film.  Rather, GLBT community members with an interest in the contents of the documentary gathered to view and debate the issues presented before a selected panel arranged by the host, Associate Professor Maria Gonzales.

The TSU showing was attended by protagonists of the film, excluding Andy Kahan.  At the U of H showing Professor Berryhill was not available, however Andy Kahan, victims advocate, was at the U of H showing.   Jon Buice, while a major player in the documentary, was not at either showing due to circumstances beyond his control.

The TSU showing catered mostly to journalism students and Alumni who were there to see Professor Berryhill’s participation in the documentary.  There is no apperception of the contents as none of the students, Alumni or Professor Berryhill had seen any of the content prior to the showing.  Professor Berryhill from the first days of his involvement in the plight of Jon Buice, as it related to Chaplin Hill’s unjust persecution at the Wynne Unit, become an avid researcher.   He involved his graduating class in an exercise to gather facts in the case in order to show the importance of truth in journalism.  Many of the players in the film from opposing sides were interviewed by these students.  The facts were refined and utilized by Professor Berryhill into an Article posted in the Blog: “Grits For Breakfast” - 'The Death of Paul Broussard, the Parole of Jon Buice: How the News Media Have Played and Were Played', Michael Berryhill, Thursday, July 11, 2013  see,  Death of Paul Broussard, the Parole of Jon Buice - Grits for ...

After the showing of the documentary at TSU, Alison Armstrong conducted a ‘question and answer’ period for audience participation and feedback about the film and its contents.  Ray Hill, Linda Hill, Professor Berryhill and I were on hand to answer questions if queried.  Also available were, Jerry Hattan – Cinematographer and Allan Pogue – Photographer who provided black and white stills of prison life in the film.  The audience directed various questions to each of the participants in the film. 

Ray was asked about his change of position from organizer of media and GLBT community outrage to confident and friend.  They were seeking to understand if Ray in a moment of conscience felt that he had done an unjust action in the conviction of Jon.  Ray was not apologetic about is part in the media extravaganzas during the days prior to the conviction or for the yearly vigil’s for Paul Broussard conducted in the Montrose GLBT community.  He did confirm that after knowing Jon that he realized that the death was not a ‘Hate Crime’ as portrayed year after year by Activists, Media and various GLBT Caucus members in the media after his change in position.  Professor Berryhill was asked about his motivation and his views concerning the early media and the continuance of hate crime dicta by activists like Andy Kahan and Noel Freeman.  Professor Berryhill explained his position in the matter and his disdain for the subjection of a Catholic Chaplin, Linda Hill, in a travesty of injustice conducted by the Wynne Unit in Huntsville, Texas.  A longtime associate of Linda Hill, Michael Bass exposed the lunacy of the accusations presented in the Houston Press article, "Hate Crime and Punishment," noted in the documentary, about the purported scandal that cost Jon his parole in 2010 and Linda Hill’s dismissal of a 27 year ministry within the Texas Prison System.  Michael expressed that Linda was both Jon and his spiritual advisor and that she was instrumental in helping him to become successful in his life outside of the TDCJ.  He stated that Jon and he made a pact to stay on the straight and narrow, not join gangs, educate themselves and strive to be successful when released.  Michael now owns a successful real-estate investment company and is the proud father of a beautiful daughter, Grace Evelyn Bass.  Other questions were directed to the results of the polygraph.  It was explained that Jon passed a total of three (3) polygraphs.  One concerning the accusations of inappropriate involvement with Linda.  One concerning the night of Paul’s death and his motivation (hatred towards Gays) and one concerning the coercion by Wardens in the TDCJ - Wynne Unit admitting involvement with Linda.  The polygraphs confirmed that Jon not only passed the tests but did so under adverse conditions that would produce sporadic results if lying were attempted. 

Later that evening an entirely different audience assembled in a small viewing room in the Student Center at the U of H.  The showing mostly catered to the GLBT community who were interested in the documentary.   A panel was assembled by Professor Gonzales to address questions at the conclusion of the film.  Professor Gonzales was in the documentary and like Professor Berryhill had not seen any of the content prior to the showing. In the documentary Professor Gonzales had expressed knowledge of Jon Buice that was largely dependent on Media and participation in activities around avocation to keep Jon in prison.  Professor Gonzales’ willingness to view any information that would bring more light to her understanding was apparent and manifested in the hosting of the film for the GLBT community.  Alison Armstrong’s documentary clearly showed that Professor Gonzales had an open mind and was approachable to learn what Alison had found in her research.

Prior to the U of H showing I met Professor Gonzales briefly and found her to be a pleasant woman with a cheerful personality.  I was moved by her willingness to undertake a complex issue of opposing perspectives in the matter of Jon Buice.  As the attendees gathered, I noticed Andy Kahan who sat two rows directly behind me.  I was not alarmed by his presence because while I take great issue with his advocacy, to keep Jon in prison, I have no personal issues with the man. 

After the showing of the documentary at the U of H, Professor Gonzales assembled a panel consisting of Alison Armstrong, Ray Hill, Christopher Haight and herself for a ‘question and answer’ period allowing audience participation and feedback about the film and its contents.  Linda Hill, and I were on hand to answer questions if queried.  Jerry Hattan, Allan Pogue and Michael Bass also were present. 

The feedback was different and unlike that at TSU.  The participants that spoke were there largely there to express their view-points centered on experiences as Gay persons rather than the contents of the film.  The first to speak was a gentleman. [Names not given due to respect for their privacy]  He began by expressing his experiences as a Gay man living in the Montrose area and the plight of its citizens over the years prior to and after Paul Broussard’s death.  Being made aware that I was present he tempered is disdain for the film and Ray Hill’s advocacy to free Jon.  Ray and he momentarily exchanged opposing view-points that seemed to elevate but were quickly deflated by Professor Gonzales.  The gentleman later apologized to me, although not necessary, for his advocacy to keep Jon in prison for the duration of his sentence, if not for life.  The next to speak was an Elderly Lady that expressed her fear over the years and that she likewise felt that Jon should remain in prison because she considered him a threat.  It was apparent to me that she was victim to the sensationalism surrounding the issue of Jon Buice. After her views were expressed another Gay gentleman began his disdain for the film by expressing that he was present during the assault of Paul that night and had returned to the bar just moments before the actual altercation.  This was quickly dispelled by Ray Hill and the opposing view-points quickly escalated into verbal exchanges that required intervention by Professor Gonzales and others present in the panel.  Alison expressed that her research had not indicated any such person and that even the other victims had not wanted to be interviewed for the documentary. After the issue was settled about his attempt to interject himself into the night of July 4, 1991, a younger black gentleman ventured his views but did not direct them to what he had seen on the film.  He touched on a point that I had made in the film on the morality of killing as a combatant in war and person killing in a crime.  His expose’ quickly escalated into the killing of black persons and in particular to the wrongful deaths of black men by police.  Professor Gonzales quickly discharged his attempt to redirect the audience from which the forum was assembled.  After the room quietened Alison asked Andy Kahan if he had anything that he wished to express.  Andy Kahan unlike most viewings that I have seem of him in the public seemed somewhat subdued and only expressed that he has known Nancy Rodriguez for twenty plus years and that he wished Jon to remain in prison for at least 27 years, the age of Paul at his death.  Ray Hill quickly responded with the absurdness of this view point but was again quickly reined in to keep any escalation from reoccurring.  Andy was also asked to disclose the politicians that had written to keep Jon in prison.  He declined to name them however Professor Gonzales did saying that she was largely responsible for their continual involvement in protesting Jon’s release.  I appreciated her honesty in the matter and hope that she will use that same ability to undo the continual bashing of Jon’s parole.  I believe that she was earnest in her desire to know the truth about Jon and would respond positively to the caucus and inspire others to move from all the lies to the truth.

Although Professor Gonzales was a welcome light in the darkness it became very apparent that there was great polarization among the audience with the exchanges that had been presented by those noted above. Other exchanges of a lesser extent not noted here.  It is not to say that the views were inessential to the value of the forum, but they like the others only redirected attention from the documentary and its message to personal experiences.  At this juncture I elected to speak with the audience about Jon.  I told them that I had members in my family that were Gay and processed no animosity whatever.  I expressed that Jon was never homophobic or racial and that he had a lot to offer society if but given the chance.  I asked those that had expressed negative views to re-examine their hearts and realize that avocation for continual imprisonment of Jon are construed by those that support Jon’s release equal to the crimes against Gays they have felt over the years.  The room went quiet and the forum concluded with Professor Gonzales and Alison Armstrong thanking all those that had attended.

After the closing of the forum I briefly met with Professor Gonzales again and expressed my appreciation for her part in the documentary and open mindedness.  I encouraged her to visit with Jon and she indicated that she would.  I told her that she would have to give information to Jon in order to be included in his visitor list.  She indicated that she would get with Ray on the particulars. I spoke briefly with Christopher Haight, Historian and panel member and told him that he could find out more about Jon on this blog.  He indicated that he was not aware that it was my blog and that he would look into it.  To my surprise Dough Caddy, Attorney-retired, a Gay gentleman that I have known for years, supporter of Jon’s release, approached and spoke briefly of his appreciation for the documentary and asked how Jon was doing.  I told him that Jon was doing well and admonished him to write Jon.  He said that he would as they had lost contact over the years. 

As I readied to exit the room, I noticed various participants and panel members in conversations about the room.  I also noticed Andy Kahan standing alone with a Journalist that I did not know, that had attended with him, adjacent to the exit.  I did not speak nor was there a visual exchange.  On exiting Alison approached and asked how I was doing and expressed her appreciation for my attendance in both showings this day.  I expressed my gratitude and proceeded to leave.  On my way through the student center to the parking area I noticed the Elderly Lady who spoke in the question and answer period, sitting with one of Jon’s supporters at a table.  The significance to this was that she was talking with a gentleman along with his wife that had told both audiences this day that he had been convicted of killing and had redeemed himself and was a productive member of society and that Jon was deserving of a second chance.  I briefly spoke with her, thanked her for her attendance and expressed that she had nothing to fear from the release of Jon and that she should re-examine her heart and find forgiveness in her heart for Jon for his transgression.  She expressed that she would think about the issues and left.  I too proceed to leave.

On the hour long journey from Houston to my home I thought to myself about the stark contrasts between the attendees of TSU and the U of H.  It became apparent that redemption and forgiveness were issues that tore at the hearts of those peering into the issues at hand.  On one hand there were those that viewed the issues without bias as they did not feel victimized by the crime.  They expressed that Jon, seventeen at the time, now forty-one had shown remorse and had redeemed himself and deserved a second chance. They took offense at the involvement of Activists and Politicians in the processes of Jon’s Parole.  They spoke of avocation against those forces.  On the other hand there were those that were in great opposition to Jon’s release as they felt victimized by the crime.  They had sought to express their own plight as a Gays rather than the merits of Jon’s plea for absolution.  I can only hope that the documentary “The Guy with the Knife” will continue to be shown and that individuals like Professor Gonzales will be receptive to its message and no longer use the political power they possess over local and state politicians to derail the parole of my son, Jon Buice. As I approached home and collected my thoughts for the night I realized that there is a long journey ahead to the end of this “Tale of Two Universities” which has just began. 

James Buice

4/25/2015

The Guy with the Knife.

SPECIAL SCREENING ON TUESDAY, April 21st. At Texas Southern University at 2:00pm in the MLK Building Room 104. [update 4/20/2015]

For the DIFF 2015 Review by Truth in Cinema click on the following:

Search Results

DIFF 2015 Review: 'The Guy With The Knife' Digs Into Media .[update 4/23/2015]

On April 15th & 16th Alison Armstrong's documentary was shown at the Dallas 2015 film Festival.  The Theater seated approximately 200 persons.  It was a pleasant surprise to see that each showing mostly filled the seating. While not a huge venue those that elected to view the film were at first mostly likely intrigued by the title and written synopsis of the film by Bridgette Poe.  Others may have came because they had some familiarity with the crime.   For what ever reason they came, to view the film, they came with a certain amount of skepticism, including myself.  All of us however left with an uneasiness of how the Justice System could go so wrong.

The relationship of  the protagonists' of the film Ray Hill and Jon Christopher Buice have long intrigued persons within and outside of the Gay community. Ray Hill who at the onset of this relationship was adversarial and was largely responsible for the lengthy sentencing of Jon Buice.  The film begins in retrospect with Ray on a road trip to Colorado City, Texas to see Jon.  As the film progresses it makes no excuses for the crime.  Neither does Jon.  He does not blame his parents, society or the drug crazed night of the crime.  Ray also makes no excuses for his part in the sensationalizing of the night of July 4, 1991 within the media.  To this day he still does not.

As the documentary progresses one begins to the understand the gravity of  how Activists with the unbridled use of Media can create a reality that is greater than the truth.  In the end the creation becomes the reality and the truth becomes a quest that must endue the pain of running a gauntlet of extreme biased scrutiny.  Those that would rather accept the views of an Activist, with a self-serving interest, gather in their preconditioned view, rather than truth, and line up to strike down any rhetoric to the contrary of their belief. 

Alison in no way attempts to place judgement one way or the other on Jon's part in the death of Paul Broussard.  Rather she addresses the person that Jon is now in contrast to the 17 year old adolescent who was party to an altercation that got out of control and escalated into the tragedy of Pauls death.  It strikes down the aspect of Rays avocation in 1991, that it was a hate crime.

After the opening scenes of Ray inciting the Gay Community locally and Nationally it turns to a more humanistic out-pouring by Ray to Jon and how they over a period of time became the friends they are today.  It also develops the turning point for Ray to begin his advocacy to free Jon.  One can see Ray's change of heart is largely due to his own conscience once he comes to understand that Jon did not go to the Montrose area of Houston, on July 4, 1991, to murder anyone and that he was not the homophobic killer he promoted.  

Jon moves from adolescent to adulthood in the film with recognition and acceptance of the tragedy that he has caused for the families he has harmed.  Both Paul's and his own.  It becomes apparent that he has reached deep within his soul and cries out for forgiveness from Nancy Roderiguez, Paul's mother.  However it is not forthcoming as Ray after his appointment as leader of the GLBT Caucus, keeps the ideal of a hate crime alive with the yearly vigil held to commemorate Paul's death. Nancy is shown suing the families of the assailants for her pain and suffering.  Although not disclosed in the film, Jon's family was sued for 2.5 million.  She did not prevail in achieving her goal because her legal team was unable to show failure by myself to control the actions of Jon Buice as a minor.  She did however cause great financial difficultly over a period of years in monies spent to keep lawyers honest in their endeavors.  Eventually an undisclosed settlement by my homeowners policy settled out of court. 

Then enters Andy Kahan in 1992, an activist hell bent on keeping the sensational historical untruths promoted by Ray then leader of the GLBT Caucus.  A yearly vigil is shown that was held to commemorate Paul's death along with the hate-crime rhetoric re-flamed year after year until Ray reaches out to Jon.  Andy comes across in the film as inept in his understanding of the truth and is the self proclaimed leader of those that oppose Jon's parole.  As he speaks the audience begins to realize that Jon is not the problem, Andy is with his narcissistic cries for his perverted sense of justice.  He even admits that he knows nothing about Jon and continues to promote lies without putting the proof in the public eyes for scrutiny.

As the film nears the end, the plight of Jon's journey to freedom is shown to be besieged by the continual set-offs, by a Justice System that is governed by Activists, Media, the GLBT Caucus and Government Officials meddling with the processes.  The audience is moved from the lies and media hype of the past to the truth in the matter of Jon Buice and the death of Paul Broussard.  There is sense of agitation within the audience with the likes of Andy Kahan and the meddlesome endeavors of State Elected Officials.  This becomes apparent each day with the question and answer period that was conducted after each showing.  Alison is very responsive to all questions and the audience is receptive of her answers.

Thank You Alison for your fair and unbiased documentary "The Guy with the Knife"  It was a long time coming and I pray that it has some bearing within the days to come with the continued showings next week to the Houston GLBT Caucus and others.  Hopefully they too will come to an understanding of the truth in the matters of Jon Buice and will undo the damage they continue do to his parole processes with the control they have over Politicians that govern the Parole Board.  It is time that they push the pendulum to a fair and balance view.  Jon has a lot to offer to society other than being the poster child of a Texas Hate-Crime that was never was.

James Buice

4/17/2015

Good Grief Ressie…?

The Texas Board of Pardons and Parole processes are at best, a travesty.  The Chair Person along with Voting Members are inept and ruled by Politics.  They bow down in deference to Activists, Caucuses, Politicians and other Self-Serving Groups.  For over a decade, High Profile voices have high-jacked the parole of Jon Buice.  Each year their vilifying of Jon has offset his parole.  There is no merit in what they do.  It is only a vehicle in which they assert their power.  It has nothing to do with justice.  It has only to do with the pretense that justice is being served.  

Between September and October, 2014, the Texas Board of Pardons and Parole presented the illusion of deliberating the matters of Jon’s parole.  The fact is that it was only a façade which hid the real facts – Doing the bidding of Special Interest Groups.   Silence in this blog allowed time to collect my thoughts.  Initially I wanted to write but could not find the words without lashing out in rage at those who, for their own self-serving interests, derailed Jon’s parole again.  I was bewildered by the Charade I received at the Parole Board –Angleton Office.  The moment I sat down with the Lead Voter - Cynthia Tauss, I knew the decision to keep Jon in prison another year had already been decided.  It mattered not, what would be said, the offset for another year was settled.  The Boards indulgence was only a formality to promote the idea of fairness, openness and transparency.  What would be said this day would have no bearing on the decision making process in the matter of Jon Buice. 

Every parole proceeding is different.  It is not really a hearing.  There is no direct exchange between those who oppose and those who promote Jon’s release.  Each proceeding begins with a certain amount of small talk and greeting by individuals that have been allowed into the proceeding in support of Jon.  I would ascertain that this is true for those that oppose.  Having never been able to address those that oppose Jon’s release I remain in darkness to the very forces that have power over the Board.  During the accolades that precede the oration in support of Jon, I ventured out a comment on how this proceeding would progress. I queried the idea of politics in Jon’s proceeding and immediately, half joking Cynthia said, “We are going to leave politics out.”  Everyone laughed because all that sat there at the conference table knew well that it was all about the politics and not the merit of Jon’s release.

Andy Kahan, Noel Freeman and Nancy Roderiguez, appeared before the Board in opposition to Jon’s release as they had done the previous year.  Prior to our theatrical reception by the Board Noel Freeman and Nancy Rogeriguez appeared on Fox 26, with Randy Wallace touting Noel Freeman and Nancy Roderiguez’s presentation.  Absent was Andy Kahan although made reference to as the Victims Advocate.  He was behind the scenes, most likely because of sanctions by the Houston Police Department.  (See previous Blog posting; “Legacy of a Liar – Andy Kahan).  During the editorial by Randy Wallace it became obvious that Nancy had been assured that Jon would be set off by the Board.  The gloat on Nancy’s face was all to telling.  Unlike in previous years, she did not have that haggard look that Andy Kahan usually had her appear before the public with in order to obtain sympathy.  It did not take a mentalist to ascertain that she was pleased knowing beforehand that she had prevailed once again.  Unlike in 2011, when Jon was granted parole and Andy Kahan had to obtain numerous politicians (See previous Blog posting; “Conspiracy”, In 2011.) to dictate to the Chair of the Board, Ressie Owens the overturn of Jon’s parole, she seemed elated.  Since that time these same politicians have continued to outcry a crime they have no direct knowledge of other than the erroneous editorializing and fabricated untruths of Activists and Media.  Ray Hill who originally started these untruths in 1991, now an activist for Jon’s release, was reassured by John Whitmire, on several occasions that he would not advocate with Andy Kahan.  Rather John Whitmire advocated with the Democratic and GLBT Caucus’ now lackeys of Andy Kahan.  A crafty way in which he was able to give the pretense of being straightforward and honest while being vile and corrupt.

Bill Habern- Attorney, Alison Armstrong- Film Journalist, Shelly Buice- Jon’s mother, Cristy Drexler- Child-hood friend, Lan Buice-Jon’s stepmother and myself appeared before the Board in support for Jon’s release.  Each person expounded advocacy for justice and a fair and unbiased hearing in the matter of Jon’s parole.  We concluded our exposes’ with a little contrived levity to lighten up the lackluster demure of the proceeding.  The predisposed demeanor of Cynthia Tauss in the mornings conference concluded with feeling of forlorn.  We knew from the moment that Cynthia made her statement about “Politics” that the decision had been made and we appeared for naught.  Bill Habern; Knowing that the Board would vote, “Non Release”, as long as John Whitmire and others protested Jon’s release only presented a rehashing of past articles of law in Jon’s case and emphasized Jon’s was released previously until politicians intervened.  Alison Armstrong; while not originally invited to the proceedings, was requested to attend by Bill Habern.  She agreed because of the audacious attack by Andy Kahan on her character after she exposed him for his lies in the matter of Jon Buice.   Alison told me prior to the proceeding that she had never made herself a part of any actions directly associated with the subject matter of an impending Documentary but felt because of Andy Kahan’s attacks, she must to further expose his deceit and treachery.  I believe that she was not given the respect for her candor in the matter.  Shelley Buice; Jon’s mother appeared for the first time before the Board to advocate for Jon’s release.  Due to chronic medical concerns she has over the years relied on Bill Habern and me to advocate her support to the Board.  Because of the continuous set-offs by the Board she felt that she must go and see for herself the proceedings.  She left unfulfilled and amazed at the lack of sincerity presented by the Board.  Christy Drexler; a child-hood friend of Jon and a great support to Shelley, helping with transportation to see Jon each month, advocated with little acknowledgement of its merit other than a graciousness pretense by the Board.  The nature of her advocacy was critical to the character of Jon Buice then and now.  She too, felt that all was for naught.  Lan and I; Stepmother and Father of Jon, have advocated for his release over the past decade.  We have endured Jon’s incarceration and continuous set-offs year after year.  We also left the Board that day with an uneasy feeling in the matter. 

As usual we found out later by the Houston News Media that Jon had been set-off again.  Media agencies and Advocates are able to obtain the information due to a hot line that can be accessed by all.  It is a fact of life and little at present can be done to give Jon the right to know prior to the general publics’ knowledge.  In the eyes of the Parole Board and the TDCJ, Jon has no rights.  Other than a cursory interview by a non-appointed Board associate Jon gets No hearing.  Just like he got, No Trial, only Advocacy to keep incarcerated and No Justice.   The Board associate only interviews inmates to ascertain his general well-being, any self-proclaimed accomplishments over the past year and to inform him of his upcoming parole proceeding.  Any other activities by the associate are unknown to Jon or others as the associates’ findings are not reviewed in the proceeding.

Alison Armstrong went to see Jon after the proceeding to seek more material for her documentary.  Even now I am not sure of the intent of her interview with Jon other than what Jon told me.  I have never been closely associated with her other than be interviewed for the documentary.  I have always had an uneasiness toward Journalists because of the way they use media.  In the past lengthy film footage has been taken of me and then only seconds of film used to purvey a statement, out of context, in hopes to show a confrontation between Nancy Roderiguez and myself.  I have hopes that in light of her advocacy before the Board that the documentary does not do the same.  I as others will have to wait until it is released.  Alison has for the past nine years been developing a documentary about Jon that will be aired at the Dallas Film Festival on April 15 & April 16.  The April 15^th showing will occur at 7:45pm at the Angelika 8 Cinema and April 16^th at 5:00pm at the Angelika 8 Cimema. Other showings are to occur in Houston at several locations after the Dallas Film Festal showings.  Alison has not set times for these showings.

After the media’s announcement of Jon’s “Non-Release” vote by the Board I spoke with Jon and tried to get a view of his well-being.  After all the malicious dealings of Andy Kahan and his inroads into the TDCJ and now the State Legislature.  (See earlier posts in this Blog to understand the extent of his treachery with the help of the TDCJ-Wardens and Under-Wardens at the Wynne Unit in 2010) I get a snapshot of his mindset.  I encourage him to continue on with his schooling and stay free of all the debilitating aspects of prison life.  He always appears to be stronger than I often comforting me rather than me comforting him.  I asked Jon how he felt about what had transpired at the Board and he replied, “Dad, I feel like Charlie Brown”.  I responded, “How is that.  What do you mean?”  Jon said, “It is like the cartoon strip where Charlie Brown has asked Lucy to hold the football where he can kick a field goal.  Lucy agrees to hold the ball.  Charlie asks Lucy if she is going to pull the ball away like she has done so many times in the past.  Lucy assures Charlie that she is not going to do that.  So Charlie readies himself for the kick.  He envisions a glorious field goal winning the game.  Just as he is about to initiate his journey toward completing the kick, he inquires of Lucy again, ‘are you really going to hold the ball this time’.  Lucy reassures Charlie.  He is off toward the kick and to his amazement seconds later he lying on his back on the ground starring up at the sky in bewilderment.  Lucy had pulled the ball away again."

I thought to myself, GOOD GREIF RESSIE….  Just like Lucy she continues to pull the ball out from under Jon.  I firmly believe after my last journey to the Board that Board Chair, Ressie Owens continues to hold Jon in prison for her own political well-being as State Senator, Congressmen and Special Interest groups that oversee her office and can have direct bearing on her reappointment as a Parole Board member and more importantly as the Chair-person.  All Board members are appointed and not elected into their position.  I believe that since Ann Richards was Governor of Texas it has been this way.  Rumor was that Richards was displeased with a Parole Board Member telling her to take a hike in a parole she did not want to occur.   After that incident, the Democratic run Texas Legislature, of the time, changed the rules of the game and placed the Texas Board of Pardons and Parole under the Governor’s office.  This set the stage for the Board to operate in continued secrecy with little or no accountability to constituency.  Think that this not a travesty.  Think again.  Texas is the most incarcerated State in the Union.  For that matter the World. 

Weeks before Jon’s parole proceeding I had went to the Huntsville Board Office where Ressie Owens conducts the business of the Board.  I spoke with her about Jon and his upcoming parole.  As in past meetings with Ressie the conversation was polite and mostly one-way with her listening, appearing to assimilate what was being said.  I read a letter asking her to advocate to the voting member Cynthia Tauss for Jon’s release.  After reading my letter to her she said that she would re-read the letter and pass it on to Cynthia.  After Jon expressed his feelings as Charlie Brown that I too realized that I felt the same.  While at the parole proceeding I had asked Cynthia if Ressie had sent her the letter where I had asked for Ressies’ avocation.  I remember how Cynthia had stumbled in her response until I qualified the significance of the letter.  Cynthia then awkwardly recovered saying yes she had seen it.  Being that I had given the letter originally to Ressie with her agreeing to forward it on to Cynthia, hopefully with admonition to release Jon, I gave her a copy.   I don’t believe that Ressie had sent a copy to Cynthia prior to the proceeding.  This is because a month after the Boards vote on Jon’s parole I received an official letter from the Board saying that it had been forwarded.  Ressie like Lucy while agreeing otherwise pulled the ball away.

What is going to take?   Every day, the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles grants parole to inmates that have created far greater atrocities than Jon.   They are returned to the very society that left them to the justice systems keeping.  I find it strange that the Board finds Jon exceptionally unworthy of parole in comparison to some of the individuals that they have released over the past decade.  Jon must pale in the eyes of the Board with his scholastic achievements- two Associate’s, One Bachelor’s and now a Master’s Degree.  Apparently those released are the inmates that do not know ‘how to use the system’, as Andy Kahan proclaims that Jon does.  Even inmates that have had judication while in the TDCJ have been released while Jon has not one act of aggression on record in his 23 year journey with the TDCJ.  Jon has only the untruths and treachery of the TDCJ and Andy Kahan. The travesty of Linda Hill and the trump up charges that caused Jon’s parole offset in 2010.  The accusations of the admitted liar, Andy Kahan.  The GLBT, Noel Freeman, John Whitmire and the Democratic Caucus have all come to light.  The light is now starting to shine on the Texas Board of Pardons and Parole for failing to just do the job they appointed to do.  I believe now that the justice system would have paroled long ago if not for the Travesty the Board has allowed to occur.  There are guidelines while posted to the public that are not followed.  There are rules of conduct that are ignored.  There is intercourse with politicians and a willingness to do their bidding even in view of violations to written codes of conduct.    When is it going to stop?

I have waited until now.  I know in my heart that I must continue in my efforts to keep the truth of what is occurring in my pursuit of my son’s freedom.  Jon is again 6 months from parole.  Andy Kahan is at the State Legislature asking for 10 years set-offs.  I could make the connection but will trust those that know truth know what I mean. This Blog entry may even enrage some of the Board Members.  I can only hope their anger is directed toward those that have put them in a compromised position to their own consciences’.  I never have wished anyone malice.  I have only wanted the truth to be heard.  I have been party to the “Travesty” that befell Jon in 2003 with the event of Andy Kahan.  I have seen Chronicle News Journalist, Mrs. Susan Bardwell (Now deceased) who once persecuted Jon, advocate for his release. I made a kindred friendship with Ray Hill.  I have had the best of Legal Councils, Mr. Bill Habren who has given his time and efforts without cost to help the truth come alive. I have been interviewed several times by the Journalist, Alison Armstrong over the past 7 years. All this has occurred and Jon is still not free.  Hopefully Alison Armstrongs’ film will get a message out to the masses.  I have never seen the film, but be assured that I will come April 15, 2015.  I am willingly to wait and see because I believe that Alison has found and presented the truth.  I trust that it will help free Jon if enough people see as truth also and write their elected State Legislative Representatives to advocate for Jon’s release.

James Buice, 4/5/2015  [corrections in Red, JB 4/7/15]

ENDGAME

“Intelligence”, is generally understood as:  The ability to reason, plan, solve problems; to think abstractly, comprehend complex ideas; to learn quickly; to learn from experience; to reflect in a broader and deeper capability;  to comprehend by —"catching on," "making sense" of things,  "figuring out”  what to do or ”perceive” what something is really all about.

Individuals differ from one another in their ability to:  Understand complex ideas; adapt effectively to the environment into which they are in; to learn from an experience or to form a level of reasoning that can overcome a conceptual obstacle by taking their thought processes to a level of maturity that allow them to see beyond the bigotry of a collective hamstringing.  This is true in many facets of life, whether mental, physical, spiritual, or political.

Humans in general are gregarious in their nature and are more likely to follow the masses rather than form a stand-alone opinion. It is far easier to, “go with the flow” than to formulate and accurate personalized understanding of a set of occurrences or circumstances when enticed to participate in a collective. From the times of Nimrod to the present, masses have been gathered to give power the collective over the individual. This has been verified time and time again by history.

Every day we are faced with situations that put our senses, our judgment, and our intelligence to test.  All areas of life are bombarded by those who want to add our number to their collective by enticing us, to decide, join, participate, lobby, demonstrate, protest, petition, etc., in various endeavors that will benefit the person(s), group(s), organization(s), excreta to achieve a specific objective(s) or goal(s).  It is no wonder that it becomes easier to “just go with the flow” when a premise seems to follow our individual predisposed opinions (un-intelligent view) on a particular occurrence or circumstance rather than to establish our position on the matter by research (an intelligent view).

At this point you must be asking yourself what does all-of-the-above have to do with Jon Buice.  Everything, this BLOG, Andy Kahan, The GLBT, various Local and State Politicians, Bill Habren, Ray Hill, etc., all have a vested interest in Jon Buice and obtaining a collective in the matter of his release or non-release from prison.  All have an objective one way or the other for their position.  For some it is not a matter of what happen in 1991 or the years following.  It matters not what Jon has done to redeem his life.   It matters not that Jon is a 40 year old man who has been in prison since he was a 17 year old teen.  It matter not that Jon has steadily worked toward his redemption.  Jon Buice is only the “Pawn” in an end game.

The endgame is control of the sensibility and logic of the masses to rein power over “The Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles”. This quest for power or control over that agency is the ultimate objective and has nothing to do with justice for Jon Buice or Paul Broussard.  It all about  who has control over the out-comes and power over those that disagree with their position:  Andy Kahan wants to feed his narcissism and self-presumed power over the Parole Board; The GLBT wants to extend their power over Texas Legislation and to place a warning to all that they have that power; Politicians want the power of the vote from patrons of the first two groups; Bill Habren wants to see Justice administrated in the matter of Jon Buice, in order to provide similar justice for those like Jon, who are deserving of parole, caught in a viscous end game; Ray Hill wants solstice for the misgivings he has gained over the years since he had Jon incarcerated for 45 years knowing that it was too was only for a show of power to force into existence laws giving power to GLBT community.

I too have motives as promoted in this Blog.  I too, am seeking a collective.  I too, have an Endgame.  I Love and forgive my son for the actions that he took 23 plus years ago.  I had the intelligence to research, review and verify information concerning those actions. (See previous Blog postings).  I have seen first-hand the redemption of my son, Jon Buice.  His acceptance of what occurred that night in 1991, his pursuit of forgiveness, his education and enlightenment. In contrast, I reel at the accusations and falsehoods of those opposing Jon’s release without merit for their own self-importance in the eyes of others. I anguish over the Parole Board Members caving into the various collectives in fear of losing their appointed position or potential position with the Board.  I have great contempt for the Justice System and the inequalities in matters of law based on race, religion, social presence, politics and money.  I am bewildered at the release of others that have done things far more heinous in nature and who upon release were far less achieved than that of my son.  I am in wonderment as I do not see the collectives in opposition of their release.  I have come to understand that where there is no money to be made, no political or appointed position to be obtained or retained, no self-worth to be exploited, there is:  No endgame.

I have a great disdain for any collective that promotes unfounded hate.  Not only in the case of Jon Buice but for all: Christian vs. Muslim, Sectarian vs. Jews, Black vs. White, Gay vs. Straight, Liberal vs. Conservative and etc.  The embattlement of the divided seems endless.  I often wonder if there is any redemption for anyone that participates in such misguided collectives.  My intelligence, education and faith tell me one has to rise above these great divides and put aside unfounded prejudices. Still the collectives would have us believe that we do not possess the intelligence to discern truth in such matters and that they know better which position we should take.

Truth in the end always prevails and I know that Jon will one day be freed, even if Jon is to remain in prison yet another year.  Until Jon is released I will continue to oppose those that would capitalize on the ignorance of the masses that have no real knowledge in this matter, other than what the collectives would have them believe.  I will continue to fight those that lack the intelligence or the will to investigate and verify the sources of information being presented.  I will continue to expose the motivations of those in pursuit of derailing the parole of Jon Buice.  I will not stop until knowledge of the misuse of power by our Political and Justice System officials is laid to bare and all the players are identified who would corrupt the system for self-gain.  I will not stop until I succeed at stopping the masses from being misled to unfounded positions, by the collectives, in the matter of Jon Buice.  I will continue to provide knowledge of the issues and not cave into the any that oppose his release.  This is my Endgame.

Jim Buice

6-20-2014

Legacy of a Liar - Andy Kahan

An investigation by the Houston Police Department has just confirmed what many of us already knew - that Andy Kahan is a liar.  The difference is that now we have the document to prove it. Long known for his ability to whip up the media by sensationalizing  crime even when it meant inventing facts or simply grossly exaggerating Andy Kahan has been found by his own employer to be quite simply a liar. He has even admitted it himself. But don't take my word for it.

Read the report for yourself.

I am still trying to get the message out about the documentary:  https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/2007855498/the-guy-with-the-knife

Any help in this matter would be greatly appreciated.  Although I have had little to do with this documentary’s making other than appearing in it, I believe that it will greatly help set the matter straight about the event.  Hopefully it will help undo the damage all the lies of Andy Kahan over the past 13 years.

Further information can be found in this blog in previous posting. 

Jim Buice

Conspiracy -

Modern Day Alliances of Local Houston Politicians, Houston based State Politicians, US State Politicians and the Houston GLBT Caucus.

In November, 2013 - Local Houston area Politicians and Houston based State Politicians and U.S. Texas State Politicians united with the Houston Gay, Lesbian, Bi-Sexual and Transgendered Caucus (GLBT), Andy Kahan and Fox26 News to form a unified front to derail the parole processes of Jon Buice in 2013. 

I believe there is a Conspiracy by these Politicians, including but not limited to, State-Senators, Congressmen, US. Congressmen/women, and numerous other state Politicians directly involved with Houston Area Lobbying factions listed above in the derailment of Jon’s parole.  The list of potential players, is largely unknown except for those named in recent expose’s because the Texas Parole Board operates in secrecy and will not divulge the names of government officials or groups protesting Jon’s release.  It is possible that the list of politicians could even include the office of the Governor.  They all feel the need to keep Jon in prison because of the potential voting power of the collective Gay Caucus’ within Houston, the state and the nation.  Consumed with their self-serving thoughts of superiority over the masses they are quick to join the “I am protecting society” agenda when in fact they are only concerned about their own well-being.  Effectively they are individuals or groups that have been organized [or take it upon them-selves] to punish an individual for a perceived crime when the processes of law appear to be inadequate or do not suit their idea of Justice.  This has become largely the case as our society moves toward a national and state government where those elected feel they are empowered by the status of their office to make decisions for those appointees [the parole board] under their jurisdiction, at the expense of individual rights.

Jon’s denial of parole by the Texas Board of Pardons and Parole, as I was told, was due to public perception.  That in effect was, lobbying by the GLBT Caucus and Andy Kahan on Houston area, State and US. Politician’s with their, “Hate Crime Rhetoric”. What transpired was a political tsunami of such magnitude that the Board personnel responsible for the decision were more than likely admonished by higher authorities, within the Board, to perform their duties contrary to published directives in the oversight of release as written in -  “Parole Guide Lines” http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/bpp/parole_guidelines/parole_guidelines.html

Jon became eligible for parole in 2003 under state laws established for the release of inmates from the Texas Department of Criminal Justice during the time of his original adjudication. In summary Jon would be eligible for parole after 11.25 years [1/4^th of his total sentence] provided that he worked, stayed free of trouble [good time] and satisfied the minimum number of days to be served.

Jon’s first consideration for parole was in 2003.  Jon had spent the minimum time required in his sentencing to be eligible.  During this 11 plus years Jon completed High School, obtained two (2) Associates and a Bachelors of Science Degree.  His disciplinary record was exemplary considering the number of years served and the various locations of his incarceration throughout Texas.  All things considered Jon was a prime candidate with a relatively low recidivism (relapse into criminal behavior) risk rate in accordance with the “Parole Guide Lines”.

Hate Crime Rhetoric and the Parole Board

In the years prior to Jon’s first parole hearing Ray Hill and the Gay community held a yearly memorial in the Montrose area of Houston for their self-promoted Hate Crime Martyr, Paul Broussard.  At these yearly rallies various individuals who were associated with Paul, including family members, would publically espouse their venom to the Gay Community.  By the time Jon became eligible for parole in 2003 this hatred was focused and a game plan was put into play to keep Jon in prison at all costs using any means necessary including promoting lies [Hate Crime Dicta], false testimony, and hearsay within the media to elevate the death of Paul to the same level as the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr, Hate Crimes. See - Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act ... .  Andy Kahan’s hate crime rhetoric, the GLBT and Politicians willing to carry out his agenda have risen to a level that is reminiscent to the vigilantism of a lynch mob.  Jon’s release has become more and more difficult to achieve with each subsequent hearing. The vendetta that Andy Kahan created has risen to the current levels of deceit and secrecy where Politicians have willingly and wrongfully manipulated the parole process.  The Gay Community through the GLBT has in turn become guilty of the very thing they created legislation for – “Hate Crimes”. 

For ten (10) years I allowed the processes to be what they were in hopes that the Parole Board would do the right thing considering that they were to judge Jon’s release on what he has demonstrated over the years of his incarceration on not the current forces that are restricting their positive vote to release. 

In 2013 with the help of Bill Habern and others it was brought to the attention of the authorities that Andy Kahan was using his HPD position as the Victims Advocate illegally. He is presently under internal investigation with the possibility of prosecution for a felony crime.  How this will play out is anyone’s guess at the moment.  That is to say, the same Political friends aiding Andy in Jon’s non-release vote may well be trying to cover this incident as other Politicians have covered Andy’s transgressions in the past.

In order to level the playing field in this arena I am reaching out to the masses, through information included within this writing, seeking help to stop the injustice that has taken place over the past 23 years.  While Jon deserved prison time for his part in the death of Paul, in no way did he deserve more than the 5 others that were equally guilty of this tragedy.  As it is Jon has served 8 years beyond their sentences and may well serve many more if I am unable to stop the Political machine that Andy has put into play.   

As the following is quite lengthy I will summarize my intent here:  If after reading this posting you in turn feel that Jon is deserving of a second chance please write to your district and state representatives and the Parole Board members listed at the end of this posting with your noted disdain for their actions in Jon’s parole processes.

The Road to Perdition began In 2003 - Houston’s Gay community moved from the public arena to the parole proceedings.  Aided by the media, Andy Kahan took up the banner of public justice and began the crusade to keep Jon in prison.  Andy had at his beck and call all Houston media outlets - ABC, NBC, CBS, The Houston Chronicle and the Houston Press willing to promote his agenda.  It is believed that Andy also had inroads into the TDCJ with individuals who had direct access to Jon’s file willing to feed him information.  [Although knowledgeable sources have expressed this, proof is not readily available, it is believed that a person known to me only as “Raven”, who worked within a victims’ advocacy group, aided Andy by removing positive information from Jon files and replacing it with erroneous information like the knife he continues to show in the media]

I met with Mrs. Owens (lead voter) along with my wife, Jon’s stepmother, and Ray Hill (Gay Activist and Prison Reform Advocate and Radio Personality).  My wife and I expressed to Mrs. Owens our wishes that Jon be released and that we would provide a home, support and guidance to help him adjust.  We recounted Jon’s accomplishments (three college degrees) obtained while in the TDCJ.  We provided a signed petition of 150 plus names of supporters

Ray Hill explained his role in promoting Jon as a poster child to further hate crime legislation for the Gay Community.  He also elaborated on the fact that most of the pretrial media was biased towards those goals.  He expressed his, then current, relationship with Jon and that he had come to know Jon as an honest, caring and trustworthy person in total contrast to his original perception.  He further elaborated on what actually occurred the night of Paul’s demise and the lack of expediency from medical respondents to the scene.  He still shares the same views.

At my request Mrs. Owens went to see Jon and I believe that the face to face tempered her decision on the amount of time that he was to be set-off.  Frankly I thought that the set-off was due more to the other defendants in this case still being in the TDCJ than with any specific abhorrence she may have had for Jon.  Although sadden by the decision, I understood the decision in this context and accepted it as logical at the time.  We concluded that two (2) years in the scheme of things would not be long if Jon were to receive parole on his next review.

In 2005 - I met with Mrs. Owens again and expressed my hopes that Jon would be paroled.  I thought surely that she would grant Jon parole as all other defendants had been released and Jon had an impeccable record.  We reiterated Ray Hill’s involvement in Jon’s sentencing and his role in the bogus media play pertaining to Paul’s death.  However we were shocked she returned a non-release avocation.

I became painfully aware of Andy Kahan; his use of Paul’s, Nancy Rodriguez, to obtain entry in to the parole proceedings and pervert them; his stepped up media play and use of Mrs. Rodriguez to perpetrate lies to the public, and to influence Mrs. Owens decision making processes in favor of a non-release disposition.  This was in my opinion a banner year for Mr. Kahan and his influence over the parole proceedings.  The Board submitting to his influence affirmed that his use of the media could motivate the Board into adopting a compromised position when it came to the high profile cases that he wished to pursue.

In 2007 - I met with, Mr. Conrith Davis. (lead voter) I was a little taken back by this because Mrs. Owens met with Andy Kahan and Mrs. Rodriguez but not with me.

Mrs. Susan Bardwell, Police Reporter, (now Diseased) for the Houston Chronicle and Houston Post during the years leading up to and after Jon’s conviction, accompanied me to the Board.  Mrs. Bardwell was originally opposed to Jon’s release because her son was Gay, until she met and talked with me.  At that time she come to know the truth about that night, and went to meet Jon.  She became an advocate for Jon’s release and talked with Mr. Davis about Jon and her perspective on things. Although Mrs. Bardwell is no longer with us but I am sure that she would still support Jon’s release.  [Mrs. Bardwell wrote a positive Houston Chronicle about Jon this same year.  However, I can no longer find it in the Media archives].

Had I known the damage that Mr. Kahan and Mrs. Rodriguez would do impressing Mr. Davis’ decision I would have taken steps to present Jon’s worthiness for parole to him differently.  Had I known that Mrs. Owens would not be part of the process, although I think she had a great deal of influence on them, I would have approached Mr. Davis with more skepticism concerning his knowledge about Jon’s case.

I can only conclude that what transpired in The Board office by what was said the afternoon after their interview.  Mr. Kahan and Mrs. Rodriguez at KTRH-740 Radio along with Chris Baker proceeded to tell vicious lies about Jon and how they had persuaded the Board to off-set Jon’s parole and bragged that they agreed to keep Jon in the TDCJ for up to 27 years to equal Paul’s age at his death. [This is the first time 27 years is mentioned in any context to Jon’s sentence length]  Chris Baker’s program was where Andy Kahan first made the statement that Jon “Gutted Paul like a Pig” and then later that same day on a trailing news bulletin had Mrs. Rodriguez restate it as “Gutted like a deer”

After Jon was set-off I called Mr. Davis and asked why Jon was set-off and why for 2 years.  His reply seemed a little trite at the time as his reply was that the 2 years just followed suit with what was previously used as a set-off time.  At a later date, not long after that, during a meeting at the Wynne Unit with Peer Group Counseling of Inmates, Jon approached both Mr. Davis and Mrs. Owens.  Mr. Davis expressed to Jon that his time for parole was coming.

In 2009 - I started early in the processes pertaining to Jon’s parole in hopes to circumvent Mr. Kahan and Mrs. Rodriguez’s perversion of the parole process by pointing out various things to Mrs. Owens.  I wrote several letters to her and hand carried them to the Huntsville office for delivery to her out of fear that they would not be given to her if there was a mole [Raven] within TDCJ and possibly even the Board offices.  My intent was to make Mrs. Owens aware that Jon has worth.  He made a grave mistake as a youth, however I believe with all my heart that he has taken responsibility for his actions and carries a great burden in his life pertaining to Paul’s death.

 I gave a copy of the autopsy report to Mrs. Owens showing - the wounds that Jon inflicted on Paul were not of the gutting type, nor would they in themselves have caused Paul’s death.  I did this to combat the lies being told by Mr. Kahan and Mrs. Rodriguez.  I further showed that Paul did not die that night, rather later the next day and all the ramifications leading up to his death, giving credence to what Ray Hill had said in her office in 2003. 

[Although Jon contributed to Paul’s death, he was not the sole perpetrator. 5 other boys participated and that Houston’s paramedics were also complicit.  Since that eventful night three separate and independent pathologists have confirmed that the knife wounds in themselves, had Paul been properly attended to, would not have led to Paul’s death.]

I further re-attested to Mrs. Owens all accomplishments that Jon has achieved while incarcerated in the TDCJ.  That being:  Three college degrees prior to the 2003 parole review.  Since then and in particular in the years between his 2007 set-off and  2009 Jon went from being a dock truck loader to the Lead Administrator (Computer Tech) responsible for the Wynne Prison Unit Computer Network while he was there.  During that same two (2) years Jon obtained 8 separate Microsoft System Engineering Certificates and Three Cisco Systems Certificates.  [The significance in this was that Jon processes the credentials to obtain a serious work once outside of the TDCJ and be successful.]

 Officially at Jon’s hearing, I met with Mrs. Owens and Mr. Leeper seeking Jon’s parole once again.  I brought up Jon’s achievements over the past two (2) years and showed the opportunities he would have available to him once released.  We noted that he was involved in a Christian Out-reach program and at that time, in a section of the Wynne Unit called the Christian Dorm.  At this point in time Jon was in the last weeks of the program and was to move on to other endeavors.  Mrs. Owens and Mr. Leeper were very interested in this aspect of Jon’s involvement in prison programs.  Prior to making a ruling on Jon’s parole Mrs. Owens went to see Chaplain Hill, at the Wynne Unit about Jon.

 [A discussion about Jon occurred at this time between Chaplain Hill and Mrs. Owens and ended with Jon being conscripted by Chaplain Hill and two other correctional officers to help in an upcoming new influx of inmates to the Christian Dorm which would culminate in March of 2010.  Mrs. Owens returned a ruling of “Under Continuous Review” with no definite dates. It was my feeling that they were to rule in Jon’s favor in March 2010 to be released.  We were in hopes that Jon would be home by mid-year. ]

In 2010 - To my astonishment Jon’s parole did not occur as Jon was brought up on charges in March of 2010 for inappropriate liaisons with a correctional officer.  He was stripped of his classification and 30 days of his good time.  He was also removed from the Wynne Unit and his IT job with computers, and shipped to the Wallace Unit in Colorado City, Texas. 

The circumstances leading up to Jon’s case were something out of the Twilight Zone.  The perverted twist that the Wynne Unit Warden and Unit-Under Warden put on Jon’s relationship with Chaplain Hill are what you would expect in a prison movie where a Warden with absolute power wanted to destroy someone’s life.  Destroy not only Jon’s parole chances but also one of their own, Chaplain Hill’s spotless records of service.  Further, it is beyond my comprehension to understand why the Justice System would have a Christian Dorm with outreach programs that are designed to show inmates how to trust and care about one another (Christianity) and then pervert a relationship developed in “love of your fellow man”, one of the five (5) types of love a human can possess.  I can only assume it was for the Warden and his underlings own self-gratification that it occurred. 

[It was, I believe a conspiracy to defame Jon, a conspiracy, initiated by Andy Kahan and his influence on the Warden at the Wynne Unit.  There is a good chance that no one will ever know all who were involved except the players.]

Jon was stripped of his classification and sent to the Wallace Unit.  His parole hearing was set off until March 2011.  Jon went to work as a sowing machine technician although he has schooling for much greater things. 

I spoke with Mrs. Owens and explained to her that Jon and Chaplain Hill had done nothing wrong.  Chaplain Hill challenged the TDCJ concerning the 10 counts against her.  Eight (8) of the rulings were in her favor by the State Attorney and the TDCJ was given notice to provide the tapes to her that they had made.  Chaplain Hill’s Lawyers since then have noted that the tapes, under normal circumstances, amount to nothing, and. that the situation and context of the offenses were perverted by officials of the Wynne Unit. 

Jon went through two (2) Lie Detector Tests with the unanimous decision being that there was no deception in his answers.  The significance in this is that they asked Jon all sorts of questions pertaining to his character and involvement in things contrary to his well-being in prison life.  Several technicians that reviewed the LD tapes agreed that Jon was truthful.  To my way of thinking this in itself should remove all doubt about Jon’s worthiness for parole.

The problem is and has always been someone in a position of authority in the TDCJ seeking to harm Jon’s chances for parole.  Every time Jon has been eligible for parole someone or some situation from which Jon would later be exonerated would cause him problems that would greatly restricted his overall chance to obtain freedom.

The Chaplin Hill information was released to the Houston Press by someone in the Wynne Unit by way of Mr. Kahan.  He was given specific information that was only known by the parties involved, Chaplain Hill, myself and the officials at the Wynne Unit.  For the eight (8) months prior to the Houston Press release all was silent.

Mr. Kahan, the liberal press, Hate Crime rhetoric, and who ever at the Wynne Unit, furthered the perversion of the truth to bolster Mr. Kahan’s rhetoric that Jon is not worthy of parole.  Jon was not sentenced under the hate crime laws.  Without any thought processes other than the preservation of this power over the process, Mr. Kahan obtained and released to the public through the Houston Press information about Chaplain Hill’s job.  His release of this information to the general public caused Chaplain Hill loss of employment; curtailed her relationship in the Girl Scouts and employment with the Huntsville school district.  He has used the office of “Victims Advocate”, which he created for his own betterment, to slander and pervert truth as it pertains to Chaplin Hill and my son, Jon.

The forces trying to keep my son in prison are numerous and not all known. Although Jon has excelled in every program that the justice system has allowed him to participate in, it has become nearly incomprehensible as to what is expected of him to be considered for parole.  It is understandable Paul Broussard’s mother, Mrs. Rodriguez, will continue protest his release until the end of her days.  However, it amazes me to see people like Mr. Kahan prey on her emotions to further his agenda. [As can be concluded from the information provided above, Mr. Kahan has been prevalent in all the parole decisions since Jon first came before the Board for parole]. 

Andy has been successful in his perversion of the truth to such an extent that even Paul’s mother is victim to the hype.  Nancy Rodriguez’s rant of untruths on public radio about the death of Paul, at the coaching of Mr. Kahan has bonded .  I’ve seen pictures of things said to have been used to cause the death of Paul when in fact they weren’t.  Mr. Kahan on several occasions showed a picture of a knife that was big enough to kill an elephant when in fact the knife was never admitted to trial.  Jon did not have a trial.  Jon was forced into a plea bargain for 45 years.  Now I ask you, how is 45 years a bargain?

In 2011 - I went to the parole board in Amarillo Texas to speak with Commissioner Shipman with Bill Habern, Attorney at Law, about Jon’s release.  We presented our documents to refute the offering of Andy Kahan showing them to be erroneous and misleading. Four days later the two voting members granted Jon Parole with an FI-2 designation.  This meant that he would be let out at a specific date in the future.  That date was set in October of 2011. As in the past Andy Kahan knew of this long before anyone else and was immediately in the media with his propaganda.  The Houston Chronicle and numerous Broadcast stations picked up on the rhetoric and begin to publicize critically Jon’s release.  At the time I did not give it thought as I knew well that there would be some protesting and as often happens this would die down when it was no longer a hot news item.  What I was not aware of was the underhandedness of Andy Kahan and the extent of his underhanded ways of doing business.

While on a job assignment overseas I was informed that Jon’s parole had been overturned before it even began.  To my amazement the Parole Board reversed its previous decision on Jon’s release based on the premise that new information had been presented to the board warranting review.  At that time I was taken back because if Jon did not receive a trial with evidence being submitted then, what evidence could be submitted 20 years later to influence any decision that was to be made regarding his parole.

On returning to the United States a week later I started my discovery processes into what occurred.  To my astonishment I learned that Andy Kahan, Houston’s self-proclaimed Victims Advocate, had went to Pat Lykos, Houston’s District Attorney, Garrnet Coleman, State Representative and John Whitmire, State Senator with spurious information about Jon that was of such as sensitive nature they could not be release to the public.  They in turn, without any truthful knowledge about Jon’s case other than the media (mostly all negative) proceeded to conspire to write letters to the Parole Board Chairperson, Mrs. Ressie Owens, protesting the decision of the Boards release of Jon. This I believe prompted Mrs. Owens to send a third voter to the Amarillo region along with the two Commissioners that voted Jon’s release to reopen the proceedings.  In my opinion, this was a methodology to cover up the direct request of John Whitmire, State Senator to not release Jon.  [The significance of this is that John Whitmire State Senator serves as Chair of the Senate Criminal Justice Committee.]  This Committee has great influence over the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles. At this time I became painfully aware that Jon had become “A Political Prisoner of the State of Texas”.

In 2012 - I went to the Angleton Board and spoke with Mr. Davis.  I thought that the meeting with Mr. Davis would go well as Jon had a history with him (See summary 2007).  Mr. Habern (Jon’s council) and Mr. Berryhill (Professor of Journalism at TSU) accompanied Lan and I to the Board.  Mr. Berryhill gave Mr. Davis his views of his investigations along with Mr. Habern’s submittal of certified documents of three additional (3) polygraphs taken by Jon to vindicate him in all aspects of issues created over the years by Mr. Kahan and the Media.

During the same time period Mr. Habern and I were making our presentation to Mr. Davis, Mr. Kahan was in the media espousing his ownership of Jons’ TDCJ disciplinary records showing that Jon was less than a model prisoner and that the Board would make a favorable decision in behave of Mrs. Rodriguez.  Legal discovery of those same records by Mr. Habern showed that Jon had been disciplined on three specific occasions during his 21 year incarceration, for minor infractions.  What is noteworthy here is that none of those violations were of a violent nature.  Jons’ deplorable violations according Mr. Kahans rhetoric in the media amounted to: 1-having a piece of wire for hanging clothes, 2-having a pair of sunglasses without record and 3-having one pair of under-wear too many.  Mr. Kahan, along with Mrs. Rodriguez, perverted the issues about Jon’s disciplinary records in the too obliging media to influence Mr. Davis, to decline the release of Jon. 

My tentativeness to Mr. Kahans’ perversion of facts on Fox26 News showed that Mr. Kahan had Mr. Haberns’ Parole Brief, a document that was submitted to the Board prior to our visit.  This made me wonder how he obtained this document before it was made public record.  That being by myself or Mr. Habren because technically once it is placed in Jon’s’ file only State and Board Officials have privy to it.   [At the time I could only surmise that a State or Board Official gave it to him.]  I told Mr. Habern of my discovery and my concerns that there was underhandedness in Jon’s’ parole proceedings. 

Mr. Habern obtained, by law, this video from Channel 26 News and after review filed it with the State District Attorney in Austin, as the complainant, attesting that there is a violation of Federal Law by Mr. Kahan and an unknown State Representative that gave him the file.  [Not for the brief, rather for the disciplinary records]

Proceedings are presently taking place in this matter.  Mr. Kahan bragged to a Canadian Journalist, doing a documentary on Jon, that a State Representative had given him Jon’s files and that there was enough information in them to keep Jon in prison during the upcoming years ahead.

Shortly there-after Mr. Davis resigned from the Board due to difficulties with the release of a serial Child Molester who jumped his monitor and fled. [This was in great contrast to his decline of release for Jon, a model inmate, with 3 degrees and an enrolled student in the Master Program at the Ramsey Unit.]

As the Parole Board continues to work in secret and allow unscrupulous [possibly felonious] individuals as Andy Kahan, and State Politicians, US Politicians and groups like the GLBT, influence their decision making, I feel fully justified in viewing Jon as a political prisoner to the State and the self-serving groups perverting the issues.  Eventually the truth will prevail and I will get to the crux of why the Board finds it so hard to release someone who has proved time and time again that he is worthy of parole. 

In 2013 – Jon’s parole processes were scheduled for August then moved to the 10^th of September.  I was encouraged that I would have a good chance at getting Jon paroled this time because in August,  Mr. Michael Berryhill released his investigative report in the Political Blog “GritsForBreakfast” - Death of Paul Broussard, the Parole of Jon Buice - Grits for Breakfast.  This in turn was followed by an article in the Texas Tribune - Complaint: Legislator Illegally Released Inmate's File | The Texas ... which started the investigation of Andy Kahan for illegal activities in his pursuit to keep Jon in prison.  GritsForBreakfast followed with a second article furthering the investigation of Andy Kahan –  Grits for Breakfast: Victim advocate Andy Kahan walks back claim of ..., which in turn prompted Ted Oberg of ABC News to publish a report - Killer's lawyer says crime advocate improperly shared convict's ....  Following Ted Oberg’s report The Houston Press Blog, Hair Balls published - HPD Investigating Victims' Crime Advocate Andy Kahan

 

 On September 10, 2013 - I went to the Angleton Board and spoke with Board Member - Mrs. Cynthia Tauss.  At my request Board Commissioners, Lynn Ruzicka and Fred Rangel were present for Mr. Bill Habern and I to present our brief in support of Jon’s worthiness for parole.  The session went well and I felt that we had a good chance at getting Jon released.  Considering all the information that we had on Andy Kahan and the lies that he has consistently told it should have been a non-issue.  Mrs. Tauss said that she would go to visit with Jon prior to making a decision and she did.

 On September 24, 2013 - Andy Kahan, Noel Freeman (GLBT Caucus Chairman) and Nancy Rodriguez went to the Board with a document supposedly very damaging to Jon. [It became known, by chance review of data I processed from Jon’s sentencing days, that Andy had obtained (illegally-possibly?) through is contacts, a copy of an interview with Mike Anderson [District Attorney during Jon’s sentencing days - now deceased]

This interview was after Jon accepted the plea deal and never was admitted or vetted in a court of law and was more about the others involved rather than Jon.  It was given by Jon nearly a year and half after the death of Paul.  Jon at that time was under the opinion that he alone caused the death of Paul with his knife wounds.  It would be nearly 5 years before documents would surface from various sources to show that the knife wounds in them-selves would not necessarily have caused Paul death.  

On September 25, 2013 - Houston hosted a Victims of Crime Rally in Houston.  It is my belief that Andy had staged this rally to coincide with Jon’s parole hearing as September was the original time frame set the year before for Jon next hearing.  The Kahan organization was not prepared for the Board’s processes to bring Jon up early for parole in August.  More-than-likely, requested through Mrs. Rodriguez, Andy asked that it be delayed until September.  That would explain the Board moving the process from August to September.  [I believe that Andy was prepared to present Mrs. Rodriguez as a key element of the televised showcase furthering his stranglehold on Jon’s release.]  Andy was not prepared for the HPD Internal Investigation of his felonious activities and the restrictions therein.  This more than likely forced him into giving his mantle of crusade to Noel Freeman chairman of the GLBT Caucus – Houston. 

On September 30, 2013 - Noel Freeman and Mrs. Rodriguez were given a televised interview by Mr. Randy Wallace of Fox26 News where Mrs. Rodriguez again stated that Jon “Gutted Paul like a deer”.  See comments at, http://inthedefenseofjonbuice.blogspot.com/ “The Hound is loose…Fox26” and “How Is It That”

On October 16, 2013 – Jon informs me that he has been set-off for another year.  He sees during a news cast that he has been denied.  The media and Mr. Kahan had this finding before Jon, Mr. Bill Habern or I.

On October 17, 2013 – Mr. Habern and I received the official notification that Jon had been set-off.  I asked Bill was there any reasons given by the Board for the set-off.  He said that there was no elaboration by them and that he suspected that it was due to “Public Perception”, translated from new-speak, [an Orwellian term from the book 1984, by George Orwell], “Political Pressure by Politicians”. 

On Mach 01, 2014 – Mrs. Alison Armstrong, Canadian Journalist and Documentary Producer, launched a Documentary Trailer along with commentary on “Kickstarter”, a web based organization that specializes in raising funds for documentaries. https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/2007855498/the-guy-with-the-knife.  In this documentary trailer- “The Guy with the Knife”, Alison re-affirms the conspiracy of the Houston victims advocate, the GLBT, local and state politicians and the Parole Board.  Ray Hill is shown infuriating the Montrose area gay community in 1991.  Andy Khan and the GLBT are shown placing petitions from the gay community in Jon’s file.  [Bill Habern nor myself have never seen what is in Jon’s file to vet out spurious information].  See information at September 30, 2013.

In conclusion, to those that have read this far into the article, I am requesting help to free my son, Jon C. Buice #630496 from the tyranny of Andy Kahan, known Politicians and unknown Politicians (State and National) by requesting that you - write your Representatives, Local, State and National about the total disregard for the rule of law in the matter of the Parole processes and Jon Buice.  Also write the Austin based, Parole Chair-person, Mrs. Ressie Owens showing your support for Jon’s release and your disdain for their secrecy in this matter.  Only by putting forth a concerted effort can I ever hope to find the person or persons that are derailing the Parole Process and free my son from their “Political Tyranny”

Known Politicians: As a matter of public record

Senator- John Whitmire:

803 Yale St  Houston, TX 77007
(713) 864-8701

State Congressman - Garnett Coleman:

P.O.Box 88140

Houston, Texas 88140

US. Congresswoman – Shelia Jackson Lee

1919 Smith Street

Suite 1180

Houston, Texas 77002

(It is not known if the governor is involved but he does appoint the Board Members)

Governor – Rick Perry

Office of the Governor
P.O. Box 12428
Austin, Texas 78711-2428

Parole Board Members:

Board Chairperson – Ressie Owens

Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles
P. O. Box 13401
Austin, Texas 78711-3401

Board Member – Cynthia Tauss

1212 N. Velasco, Suite 201
Angleton, TX 77515